Unit skirmish button!

Yeah, i was kinda surprised there were no Uber-Crew in this thread.

Admittedly they've been pretty busy with the people giving them crap about ladders and matchmaking and prepping for a 1.0 release. Since this would be something of a new feature (even though it seems to us relatively easy to implement in a basic sense) I assume it is on the other side of the line drawn in the sand. Might be something that will/would get more attention once they're looking more directly on things to do beyond 1.0.

Actually, it was brought up in the reddit Q & A yesterday. Neutrino said he was familiar with the arguments, but that he just didn't get them. Seems to be squarely in the camp against.

Hmm didn't notice that one in the Q & A. I'll have to go back and try to find where he talked about it.

At the very bottom of it. I quoted it in one of my above posts.

Ya I found it. Too bad. Guess I'll just have to wait and hope someone does a decent mod that adds in some basic unit stances or things like that.

I think this sums it up.

So apparently one of the goals of PA is to have players pay direct attention to battling armies and have to implement many commands in order to make the army effective. The reasoning is that if you remove manual kiting there is not enough 'left over' to make an interesting game.

Speaks volumes of the gameplay and the confidence they have in it.

Well its not like they can make a game that appeals completely to everyone.

For me it looks like 1.0 will be just another patch that I basically ignore. I'll play a game or two against the AI and then just go back to waiting to see how the game turns out. I'm still waiting for things like these super basic unit controls and the option for different victory conditions. On that note, if someone has a mod that allows for victory conditions that are "destroy the enemy" rather than "destroy the commander" I will install that mod and play the hell out of it in an instant. I just can't understand how people find commander snipes interesting.

I just read the Q&A section and way to load the question...

Lol, ya it was pretty much the most biased against the feature possible way for someone to present the question. But other people did at least make a bit better of a stab at it.

I'm not sure who you're giving flak to here, neutrino or the question he was addressing? Either way, I don't see any problem with the question. He has a reason for his stance, and while I may not agree with it entirely (I'm also not sure if skirmish is the best solution here), I can understand where he's coming from. But accusations like

aren't helping anyone's cause, that's just flaming.

I'm really looking forward to more modding tools and docs though. I'd love to test out my own unit behaviour idea, I'm sure others are in the same boat. Too bad we can't do it yet, I think this discussion could have a lot more substance with proper tests and examples.

I concede that my assessment is a bit harsh but PA is supposed the 'ultimate macro game' - not my words, neutrino's. If automating a bit of micro that is bound to become unmanageable in later stages of the game anyways leads to 'the game playing itself' then this indicates to me that the game has little to offer apart from said micro.
Which is both not true - the game has a lot to offer that is far more interesting than small-scale clickfests already - and diametrically opposed to the purported direction of the game at large.
It is not my aim to prove anyone wrong here. It is just that the reality of the game, the communicated goals and the voiced arguments are all at odds with one another when it comes to the subject of automation. Heck, the argument brought forth on reddit is even at odds with itself, actually supporting micro-automation.

Apart from that the broad consensus of this threads seems to have been that what would make the most sense is not full-on kiting automation but a rather simple new unit stance, complimentary to those already existing.

Units skirmishing instead of standing there isn't autokiting by any stretch of the imagination and I can't help but wonder how people can't see that.

Please quite taking my words out of context and reading meaning into them. Part of the reason that I'm a lot more quiet than in the past is that whenever I say something people twist it into meaning whatever they want at the time.
Things change, games evolve and find their center. These games are made by teams of people that have differing opinions on how things should work. This has always been the case and will always be the case. Just because the game is primarily my vision doesn't mean I dictate every element of it or that every piece works out exactly how I want.

I've also said on many occasions that some amount of micro is unavoidable. The ultimate macro game is probably closer to chess than PA. When I speak sometimes I use hyperbole. Quoting me and taking an extreme position based on what I said is unfair and makes me angry I have never said and would never agree that automatic unit kiting is a feature that I would support. It's just not something I would ever do as a game designer, ever.

And while on this topic just because I've said I'm in favor of a particular feature does not mean we are promising that feature will show up in the game. Most feature ideas that most game designers come up with for any game do not show up in the game. That's just a reality of game development, things always take longer and cost more. You must make smart tradeoffs to keep moving the ball down the field.

I'n not singling you out here btw, this happens all the time. I feel like I continually have to explain how complex the process of making this game is like a broken record.

I think some of the appeal of skirmish is in direct response to the fire-and-forget nature of infernos and vanguards. The "tactic" of looping a factory of these vehicles into a sensitive area requiring tons of micro or "I win" shouldn't be possible. But that is a balance issue.

If and when they get balanced, the need for the mode is less.

Thanks for taking the time, much appreciated! Sorry for cherry-picking your quotes there, my approach to discussion is more of the deconstructing sort, I am afraid. Sorry, too, for having taken what you wrote/said/whatever at face-value, probably too much wishful thinking on my part.
I am well aware that automation is something that you never promoted, I just find that stance to be at odds with creating a macro-heavy game. But then again, I understand your concern of automation making you feel 'detached' from the goings-on in the game - I think that would be a more accurate description than 'having the game play itself'.
Be that as it may, I hope for modding support being extensive enough to support my ideas for some aspects of the game in the future.
Until then: Keep up the awesome work! And thanks for stopping by.

Basically my more subtle view is that too much automation isn't fun and won't appeal to most of the community. I am looking forward to seeing what people cook up in mods.

A most sensible view on things. Seems my personal preference got the best of me.

I actually ended up NOT buying Gratuitous Space Battles because there is no such thing as micro in the game- once your formations are made you have NO control over your fleet.